Alfred Wegener's theory of continental drift was rejected in 1912 not because of a lack of evidence, but because it violated the fundamental disciplinary boundaries of early twentieth-century geology. Wegener was a meteorologist, and his attempt to reshape geology was seen as an intrusion by an outsider. Geologists of the time were divided into two schools: 'fixists,' who believed the Earth's crust was stable, and 'contractionists,' who believed that mountains were formed as the Earth cooled and shrank, like a drying apple. Both schools agreed that the continents could not move horizontally. Wegener used an interdisciplinary approach, drawing on evidence from paleontology, climatology, and geodesy. He pointed out that the distribution of ancient plant fossils across South America, Africa, India, and Australia was impossible if the continents had always been in their current positions. He also cited evidence of ancient glacial deposits in tropical regions. However, the geological community dismissed his evidence as 'speculative.' They argued that fossil similarities could be explained by land bridges that had since sunk into the ocean. It was only when Wegener's work was reframed by a later generation using the new physics of plate tectonics that his 'meteorological' observations were finally accepted as geological fact. This shows that the reception of an idea often depends more on the credentials of the person proposing it and the established norms of the discipline than on the evidence itself.